Bush Warned the Terrorists Would Follow US.

He was Correct-- They started in England.

from JoeUser Forums


Bush has been saying that if we leave Iraq the Terrorists will follow. Guess what - That is taking place while we are in Iraq. The British have now linked the terrorist attacks last week in Scotland and the two unsuccessful attacks in London to operations in Iraq. Our occupation of Iraq has spawned al Qaeda operations in Iraq like the operations in Afghanistan that brought 9/11 to America.

There were also dire warnings this week that attacks are planned from the terrorists in Iraq for the U.S. this summer. Bush was correct about al Qaeda following. What he forgot is that they are doing this BEFORE we leave Iraq and it is his invasion that has resulted in two foreign terrorist groups to begin operating in Iraq while we have 160,000 of our military in Iraq. We now have both al Qaeda and Hezbollah operating in Iraq under the nose of both our military and the Iraqi Military we have trained. They are busy planning their next attacks of the U.S. and other non Moslem countries.

The Iraq War has spawned NEW terrorist operations in Iraq that have attacked England. How long will it be before they attempt an attack in the U.S.? The Iraq War is tragic mistake that is making our security situation worse every day.
politics
19,137 views 72 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
The Iraq War has spawned NEW terrorist operations in Iraq that have attacked England. How long will it be before they attempt an attack in the U.S.? The Iraq War is tragic mistake that is making our security situation worse every day.


Right......

Because terrorism never existed until Bush.  Terrorists attacks would happen regardless if we were in Iraq or not.  But why bother explaining that to you because everything is Bush's fault.  Get over it already.



You just don't get it.

One news report suggested the group could have been recruited by the head of al-Qaida in Iraq, but the British security official said that was "unlikely." He said the investigation was not focusing on Iraqi links, other than the fact that one suspect was from Iraq.

Patrick Mercer, a legislator in the opposition Conservative Party who is a former British army intelligence officer, said he doubted the plotters came to Britain already planning the attack.

"I think these people came into the country, possibly already radicalized or certainly sympathetic ... and the process of radicalization has been completed while they're here. My inclination is to say that these are intelligent and highly motivated people, so the probability of self-radicalization is higher," he told the AP.




 
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
almost all of the people in england and Scotland


are doctors

all of them were moderate Muslims

these people attack because they want to not because of where we are.

remember British troops are supposed to be pulling out so why attack them. making them angry enough to stay
CursorFX - Customize your Windows cursor
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
“Because terrorism never existed until Bush. Terrorists attacks would happen regardless if we were in Iraq or not. But why bother explaining that to you because everything is Bush's fault. Get over it already.”

The operations of al Qaeda and Hezbollah in Iraq did not exist until AFTER Bush removed Saddam. They operated in Afghanistan and other countries but now they also operate in Iraq!

"I think these people came into the country, possibly already radicalized or certainly sympathetic ... and the process of radicalization has been completed while they're here. My inclination is to say that these are intelligent and highly motivated people, so the probability of self-radicalization is higher," he told the AP.”


The invasion of Iraq is in part what has motivated these people to attack England and holds the potential for new attacks on the U.S.

“remember British troops are supposed to be pulling out so why attack them.” making them angry enough to stay”

WHY ATTACK THEM? Get Real. They are attacking England because England joined the U.S. in invading Iraq. We have spawned a new area of terrorism while we have 160,000 of our best troops in place along with 350,000 Iraq military we trained. With all that power, we can not prevent two radical foreign groups from establishing operations in Iraq! Anyone who believes we are making America or for that matter any country safer by our invasion and occupation of Iraq is NUTS! We are helping to create MORE radicals every day!
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
We have spawned a new area of terrorism


when did the old era end


and your right there was no terrorism in iraq before we went there.


but saddam was paying the terriosts.


so terrorism has always been a part of iraq while saddam was in power.


Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top


Reply By: danielost



"but Saddam was paying the terrorists.


So terrorism has always been a part of Iraq while Saddam was in power."

The difference is that NOW terrorism in Iraq is being directed at the west. We have created another Afghanistan where 9/11 was crafted! That is one of the results of the Bush invasion of Iraq. I do not recall that as being one of his objectives when he made the case to invade Iraq.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
The invasion of Iraq is in part what has motivated these people to attack England and holds the potential for new attacks on the U.S.


It's called "propaganda" col, something you should be real familiar with.  If it wasn't Iraq, it would be Israel they use as an excuse to attack.  Because we don't want a world-wide islamic state, motivates them to attack, because we are infidels it motivates them to attack. 

But once again why bother explaining anything to someone who suffers from BDS.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
“It's called "propaganda" col, something you should be real familiar with. If it wasn't Iraq, it would be Israel they use as an excuse to attack. Because we don't want a world-wide Islamic state, motivates them to attack, because we are infidels it motivates them to attack.”

THAT IS NOT THE CONCLUSION OF the CIA and NIE. They have stated that the Iraq War is the central cause of the growth in terrorist attacks world wide! What you are doing is using the “Bush Spin”. You should offer your services to Tony Snow - he is a MASTER at spinning the Bush GAFS.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
if the terrorists are attacking us because of Iraq

why did they attack us on 9/11

why did they attack the Cole

why did they attack the embassies

why did they attack the marine barracks
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
“If the terrorists are attacking us because of Iraq.”

The CIA and NIE said that the Iraq War is the major cause of the increased terrorist attacks. I will accept their conclusions long before anything you or anyone else on this Blog site has to say.

“Why did they attack us on 9/11?”

Because we support Israel and are in the Moslem countries. bin Laden and others have made that very clear.

“Why did they attack the Cole?”

See the answer above.

The radical Moslems do not want the U.S. in their world and they do not want Arab Governments dealing with the U.S. They also believe we have a double standard when it comes to the Palestine’s and Israel which we do! Why they hate Israel I do not know but they have hated then for many years.

Our actions in the Moslem World, especially Iraq, are inflaming an already bad situation and are making it worse. That is what Our Intelligence agencies have concluded!
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
READ:
From FOX News
WASHINGTON — A newly declassified and controversial intelligence report says that the Iraq conflict has become a "cause celebre" for Islamic extremists, but if their efforts fail it could hinder recruiting of more would-be terrorists.

The key findings of the National Intelligence Estimate state that the number of "jihadists" is growing in size and geographic dispersion, and if the trend continues it could lead to more terror attacks worldwide and more threats to U.S. interests at home and abroad.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
if the terrorists are attacking us because of Iraq

why did they attack us on 9/11

why did they attack the Cole

why did they attack the embassies

why did they attack the marine barracks


this time answer the question with real answers
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
danielost

Bin laden gave us the REAL answers-- He and the radical Moslems resent the United States in their world. The hate Israel and we apply a double standard-- We condemn terrorism by the Palestinians and turn our back when Israel occupies lands that do not belong to them and kill civilians. The Israelis have killed many times the number of Palestine’s then Israelis killed by Palestinians.

Read what OUR intelligence agencies have concluded as to why terrorism in increasing:

From FOX News
WASHINGTON — A newly declassified and controversial intelligence report says that the Iraq conflict has become a "cause celebre" for Islamic extremists, but if their efforts fail it could hinder recruiting of more would-be terrorists.

The key findings of the National Intelligence Estimate state that the number of "jihadists" is growing in size and geographic dispersion, and if the trend continues it could lead to more terror attacks worldwide and more threats to U.S. interests at home and abroad.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
READ:

Curtis Bowman
Another cog in the culture industry« Intimidation Impedes Hunt for Insurgents | Main | The Still Emerging Democratic Majority? »

December 23, 2004
What Does Osama bin Laden Want?
Don Van Natta, Jr. recently wrote a fascinating piece on Osama bin Laden for the The New York Times. I highly recommend reading the entire article, but here are a few excerpts to get you started:


What does Osama bin Laden want?

The vexing question emerged again last week with the release of an audiotape on which the Qaeda leader seems to be speaking. On it, he applauds the Dec. 6 attack against the United States Consulate in Jidda, Saudi Arabia, and urges the toppling of the Saudi royal family.

The tape indicated that Mr. bin Laden has apparently moved the fomenting of a revolution in his Saudi homeland toward the top of his lengthy and ambitious wish list, which also includes the reversal of American foreign policy in the Middle East, the retreat of the American military from the Arabian Peninsula and the creation of a Palestinian homeland.

[. . .]

Perhaps most striking is Mr. bin Laden's expression of frustration. Like any politician on the stump, Mr. bin Laden craves the ability to deliver an unfiltered message to his audience. Speaking directly to Americans in the pre-election address, he complained that his rationale for waging a holy war against the United States was repeatedly mischaracterized by President Bush and consequently misunderstood by most Americans.

To change this, Mr. bin Laden is testing what he apparently believes are more mainstream themes, while trying to dislodge the entrenched American view of him as a terrorist hell-bent on destroying America and all it stands for. In the pre-election address, Mr. bin Laden said Mr. Bush was wrong to "claim that we hate freedom." He added: "If so, then let him explain to us why we don't strike, for example, Sweden."

That remark surprised some counterterrorism officials and terrorist experts, who said the Al Qaeda leader rarely injects sarcasm into his public pronouncements. They took it as a signal that he was trying to broaden his appeal, particularly to moderate Muslims and possibly even some Americans.

[. . .]

"Osama is not a man given to humor, but when he told this joke about Sweden, I think it showed his frustration that Americans are not listening to him," said Michael Scheuer, a former senior C.I.A. official who tracked Mr. bin Laden for years and is the author of "Imperial Hubris." "We are being told by the president and others that Al Qaeda attacked us because they despise who we are and what we think and how we live. But Osama's point is, it's not that at all. They don't like what we do. And until we come to understand that, we are not going to defeat the enemy."

[. . .]

Mr. bin Laden's attempt to engage Americans is occurring while his message to drive the United States out of the Muslim world is resonating with those among the 1.2 billion Muslims who believe the Qaeda leader eloquently expresses their anger over the foreign policies of the United States and Israel. In recent years, he has emphasized the Palestinians' struggle. "His genius lies in identifying things that are easily visible and easily felt by most Muslims," Mr. Scheuer said. "He has found issues that are simple, and that Muslims see playing out on their televisions every day."

But Mr. bin Laden also wants Americans and Europeans to heed his messages and urge their leaders to change their Middle East policies. This has not happened and probably will not happen. "He is tuned out by most Americans and Europeans, and it's begun to really annoy him," said a senior counterterrorism official based in Europe.

[. . .]

Analysts say Mr. bin Laden's repeated refrain is that Al Qaeda's strikes are retribution for American and Israeli killings of Muslim women and children. "Reciprocity is a very important principle in the Islamic way of the world," Mr. Scheuer said. "They judge how far they can go by how far their enemy has gone."


Scheuer calls bin Laden's overall approach "principled hatred" — see chapter 1 of Imperial Hubris.

Bin Laden is a true believer, but he isn't stupid. He's obviously an intelligent man, clearly familiar with cost-benefit analysis:


. . . he said the United States could avoid another attack if it stopped threatening the security of Muslims. He spoke at length about what he sees as the true motive for the Iraq war - to enrich American corporations with ties to the Bush administration. (He cited Halliburton.) And he spoke of bloodshed, but this time metaphorically, about the American economy.

He mocked the United States's budget and trade deficits, saying that Al Qaeda is committed "to continuing this policy in bleeding American to the point of bankruptcy." And he said that the 9/11 attacks, which cost Al Qaeda a total of $500,000, have cost the United States more than $500 billion, "according to the lowest estimate" by a research organization in London that he cited by name.

"It all shows that the real loser is - you," he told Americans, according to a transcript by Al Jazeera, the satellite network.


Pocketbook politics, like any good politician. As I said, an intelligent man.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
The Israelis have killed many times the number of Palestine’s then Israelis killed by Palestinians.


in self defense


Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
"In self defense."

Many have been Civilians, women and Children and they were NOT in self defense. They have punished the Palestinians and I believe the ratio is about 10 times more Palestinians killed. The Israelis also occupy territory and hold the lives hostage of millions of Palestinians. The attacks on Israel are NOT justified but many things the Israelis do is also unjustified and we turn our head which enrages the Moslems!
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
Many have been Civilians, women and Children and they were NOT in self defense


the brave warriors of the Palestinians were hiding behind them

putting their weapons in their houses.

every time the Israelis do something wrong guess who turns them in.

the Israelis do.

and i guess you didn't pay attention last year.

all of these idiots in the USA that are against the war in Iraq were outraged that Israel would dare declare war on hizbollah.

just because the Israelis have better weapons they are supposed to let the Palestinians and hizbollah keep sending rockets in to their country and do nothing.


here is a suggestion if you are so in love with the Muslims go and join them.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
In self defense."


if i attack the heavy weight champion and he puts me in the hospital.

he still acted in self defense.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
“All of these idiots in the USA that are against the war in Iraq were outraged that Israel would dare declare war on Hezbollah.

Just because the Israelis have better weapons they are supposed to let the Palestinians and Hezbollah keep sending rockets in to their country and do nothing.


Here is a suggestion if you are so in love with the Muslims go and join them.”

The Question was WHY did the Moslems attack us in the past even before 9/11? This is part of the answer. I hate the radical Moslems but to ignore WHY they are attacking us is not going to enable us to prevent future attacks. When Israel destroyed a large part of Lebanon and killed and destroyed homes and the lives of Moslems over two kidnapped Israli Soldures we acted as if this was fine and did nothhing to restrain Israel. Guess what they still do not have the two soldiers back and our attitude and inaction to restrain Israel created many new Moslem enemies for the U.S. The continued Jewish settlements in the Palestinian territory and building a wall in Palestine are illegal under ANY international law and we stand by and do nothing. We occupy a Moslem country for more then 4 1/2 years and this enrages the radical Moslems. Our actions in the past as well as today are making the situation worse.

The analogy is there is a fire burning which is the hate radical Moslems have for us because of our past actions and involvement in Moslem Countries. We invade Iraq which is like throwing gasoline on the burning fire. The result is what we see today and what will most likely see in the future by new attacks on the U.S. and other non Moslem countries! Even in Afghanistan the resent civilian casualties while fighting al Qaeda is causing serious problems with the government in Afghanistan.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
Much of our involvement in the Middle East is to protect the oil we need. Look at the total failure of the past 30 years to do what needs to be done to free our dependence on the oil from the Middle East. Look at what our two former oil men have done. NOTHING! Bush tells us we are addicted to oil and does nothing to move us closer to solving the problem. All he has done is give $12 Billion in tax Credits to Big Oil which has done nothing to reduce our dependence on Middle East Oil.
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
Lebanon


the government of Lebanon backed the is really attack on herbal.

they didn't want to get directly involved because they felt that they would lose 1/3 of their troops to herbal. and they didn't want herbal to attack them.

what did herbal do after Israel pulled back.

the Muslims blame the USA for the crusades as well. how do you dictator gene respond to that
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
The New Lebanon Government DID not support the invasion of Israel and what happened is the new government of Lebanon was severely damaged by Israel- this is the new government we helped get established. To destroy almost 1/3 of Lebanon over the capture of two soldiers was OVER KILL and we stood by and let it take place. These are the actions that cause more Moslems to join the Terrorists and attack the U.S. We do not apply an even hand toward the Palestrina’s and Israelis. We supported Free elections in Palestine and then when the vast majority choose a political party Israel and the U.S. did not like, we refused to deal with them. The lesson is, “we support Democracy so long as you elect the people we approve of.”

You ask WHY do radical Moslem Groups hate and attack us. These are some of the reasons. These groups do not want us in their sand box. We not only play in their sand box but in the case of Iraq have taken it over and allowed internal factions to fight with each other and then we allowed Foreign Terrorists to enter Iraq and set up operations. Everything we have done in Iraq has enraged the radical Moslems and enabled them to recruit more Moslems to support the cause of Violence! That is what the NIE and CIA Concluded in the article I posted. That is what shows on the ground day after day!
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
"the Muslims blame the USA for the crusades as well. how do you dictator gene respond to that "

No they blame Christians and we are for the most part Christian. The Christians did cause the crusades!
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
The New Lebanon Government DID not support the invasion of Israel and what happened is the new government of Lebanon was severely damaged by Israel


you have really got to start paying attention to the news not the democrats.

the new government of Lebanon wants the government of hezbollah out of their country. along with all other groups that are funded by Syria.


"the Muslims blame the USA for the crusades as well. how do you dictator gene respond to that "

No they blame Christians and we are for the most part Christian. The Christians did cause the crusades!


no they blame USA for the crusades. I got that out of the mouth of a Palestinian.

They also consider all citizens in Israel to be in the army. all the way down to and including two year olds.
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top

"The new government of Lebanon wants the government of Hezbollah out of their country. Along with all other groups that are funded by Syria."

That is true but Lebanon DID NOT support the destruction by Israel of almost 1/3 of Lebanon.

“No they blame USA for the crusades. I got that out of the mouth of a Palestinian.”

From the mouth of A Palestinian does NOT MEAN that is what Moslems believe. They know history and understand there was NO USA during the Crusades.


They also consider all citizens in Israel to be in the army. all the way down to and including two year olds."

They may consider most Adults as part of the Army because they are. They do not consider two year olds as part of the military. You show your ignorance with everything you post!
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
They may consider most Adults as part of the Army because they are. They do not consider two year olds as part of the military


Now who do i believe an idiot with a pen in his hand.

or the Palestinian that was in the back seat of my cab.

i think i will believe the Palestinian who was in the back seat of my cab.

thank you very much



That is true but Lebanon DID NOT support the destruction by Israel of almost 1/3 of Lebanon.


OK who would support this of their country.

i said that they supported the Israeli attempt to destroy hezbollah. Which means that to a small degree they had/have to support some destruction in Lebanon